Cordwell against Mackrill
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 03 February 1766 |
| Date | 03 February 1766 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 27 E.R. 333
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Lib. Reg. 1765, A. fo. 297. S. C. 2 Eden, 344; 4 Hill's MSS. 48.
Case 251.-cordwell against mackeill. 27th, 29th January, 3d February, 1766. Where marriage articles limited a joint estate to the intended husband and wife, and, after the death of the survivor, to the use of the heirs of the body of the husband begotten on the wife. And the settlement after marriage pursued the words of the articles. Husband and wife levy a fine, and first mortgage, and then agree to sell. The articles not being produced, the Court would not decree them to be carried into execution by a strict settlement, against the purchaser, who had notice of them. (See Senhouse v. Earl, Arab. 286. Parker v. Brook, 9 Ves. 583. Partyn v. Roberts, ante, 315. Warwick v. Warwick, 3 Atk. 293. Powell v. Price, 2 P. W. 539.)-[Lib. Eeg. 1765, A. fo. 297. S. C. 2 Eden, 344 ; 4 Hill's MSS. 48.] Robert Martin, on the marriage of his daughter with William Gordwell, by articles of 6th February 1726, in consideration of the intended marriage, and of love and affection, covenanted, within three months to convey his estate in Challoch in Kent, and also the reversion of an estate in New Romney and Ivy Church in Kent in trust, for and to the use of Gordwell, and Mary his wife for their lives, and the life of the survivor, and after the death of Cordwell, and Mary his wife, and the longest liver, to the use of the heirs of the body of Cordwell on Mary, and their heirs for ever; and for want of such issue, to the use of such persons, and for such estates, as Martin by deed or will should appoint; and in default of appointment, the use of the right heirs of Martin. The marriage took effect; and afterwards, on 17th September 1728, a settlement was made by Martin, reciting the articles, and said to be made in consideration of the marriage, [516] and in pursuance and performance of the articles, by which he conveys the estates to Cordwell and his wife, for their lives, and the life of the longest liver of them, and after their death, to the use of the heirs of the body of Cordwell on Mary his wife, and their heirs for ever, with remainder as Martin should appoint, with remainder to the right heirs of Martin. There was issue of the marriage two sons, Peter Martin Cordwell, and W. Cordwell. On 26th November 1728, Cordwell and his wife levied a fine to such uses as they should jointly appoint, and in default of appointment, as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Liddell v Norton
...not bound by notice of any equities arising from the construction of doubtful words in an instrument; Cordwell v. Mackrill (2 Eden, 344, and Amb. 515). The doctrine of constructive notice is not to be extended, and the question is not, whether there were the means of ascertaining the rights......
-
Coates v Kenna
...Macnamara v. Carey I. R. 1 Eq. 9. Milner v. Milner 8. Ir. Eq. R. 488. Alexander v. Crosbie Ll. & G. t. Sugd. 145. Cordwell v. MackrillENRENR Amb. 515; S. C. 2 Eden, 344. Popham v. Baldwin 2 Jones, 320. Clarke v. Armstrong 10 Ir. Ch. R. 263. Chadwick v. TurnerELR L. R. 1 Ch. App. 310. unter ......
-
Re Harries' Trust
...lapsed into the residue; and, the wife having appointed the residue, it passed by the residuary appointment. No part remained unappointed " (Amb. 515); treating the will as indicating a wish on the part of the testatrix that the whole residue should pass; and, therefore, holding that it did......
-
Parker v Brooke
...; which is the character of the Equity set up as to the reversionary leases: Senhouse v. Earl (Amb. 285). Cordwell v. Mackrill (Amb. 515). in the cases of tenant-right, referred to, the original leases were surrendered. The persons surrendering, and accepting new leases, having only particu......